"According to a New York Times article on the subject, there is much more skepticism of global warming among meteorologists (such as Bastardi) than among climate scientists. Such skepticism appears to be widespread among TV forecasters, about half of whom have a degree in meteorology. A study released on Monday by researchers at George Mason University and the University of Texas at Austin found that only about half of the 571 television weathercasters surveyed believed that global warming was occurring and fewer than a third believed that climate change was “caused mostly by human activities." [link to en.wikipedia.org]

"According to a New York Times article on the subject, there is much more skepticism of global warming among meteorologists (such as Bastardi) than among climate scientists. Such skepticism appears to be widespread among TV forecasters, about half of whom have a degree in meteorology. A study released on Monday by researchers at George Mason University and the University of Texas at Austin found that only about half of the 571 television weathercasters surveyed believed that global warming was occurring and fewer than a third believed that climate change was “caused mostly by human activities." [link to en.wikipedia.org]

"According to a New York Times article on the subject, there is much more skepticism of global warming among meteorologists (such as Bastardi) than among climate scientists. Such skepticism appears to be widespread among TV forecasters, about half of whom have a degree in meteorology. A study released on Monday by researchers at George Mason University and the University of Texas at Austin found that only about half of the 571 television weathercasters surveyed believed that global warming was occurring and fewer than a third believed that climate change was “caused mostly by human activities." [link to en.wikipedia.org]

What do you think, why?

Quoting: Anonymous Coward 28533978

i think more and more data shows cooling, not a warming

Quoting: Luisport

I think that 100% is not exactly one answer. Personally, I believe in another: constantly doubts in serious scince researches is a necessary part of any TV shows, and TV forecasters there can not be an exception

If they accounted for the temperature bias in North America from putting our temperature monitoring stations next to air conditioning exhausts, jet engines, and bbq grills, then we would be colder then average as well.

"According to a New York Times article on the subject, there is much more skepticism of global warming among meteorologists (such as Bastardi) than among climate scientists. Such skepticism appears to be widespread among TV forecasters, about half of whom have a degree in meteorology. A study released on Monday by researchers at George Mason University and the University of Texas at Austin found that only about half of the 571 television weathercasters surveyed believed that global warming was occurring and fewer than a third believed that climate change was “caused mostly by human activities." [link to en.wikipedia.org]

What do you think, why?

Quoting: Anonymous Coward 28533978

It's caused by related, but insufficient knowledge and understanding.

Some people, ones that fall in about the 20% percentile in knowledge on a given subject, almost any subject, and have certain personality traits, such as high opinion of their ability to do things, tends to overestimate their skill badly.

To clarify that, some people who suck honestly and truly think their very good at things, even when they aren't.

That's why this happens.

Weather people, geologists and engineers tend to think they understand the climate data, often without actually having done more that cursory study on the topic, so those fields tend to have a high preponderance of people that dismiss the scientific data, due to incomplete and incorrect understanding of the topic.

In general, in any given field, you can trust what the experts say as a whole.

If you aren't personally ready to do some real study on any given field (and who is? I don't have time for most areas of intellectual discovery myself! We all specialized at times, which is fine.) Then it's best to put most of your attention into people actually doing the study themselves.

Do you trust a medical doctor with your health matters, or do you go to a smart geologist and use his information based on a few articles he read once off the internet?

Do you go to a dentist, who specializes in caring for teeth, or a barber, when you have a toothache?

If you find yourself trying to make excuses as to why you should disregard the expert opinion of the pro's, chances are really good that you simply want to have those findings to not be true!

Which is normal in a case like this. We've been given a death sentence, so many will go into denial for a long time.

But, to answer your question, that's why those people have problems with the data.

"According to a New York Times article on the subject, there is much more skepticism of global warming among meteorologists (such as Bastardi) than among climate scientists. Such skepticism appears to be widespread among TV forecasters, about half of whom have a degree in meteorology. A study released on Monday by researchers at George Mason University and the University of Texas at Austin found that only about half of the 571 television weathercasters surveyed believed that global warming was occurring and fewer than a third believed that climate change was “caused mostly by human activities." [link to en.wikipedia.org]

What do you think, why?

Quoting: Anonymous Coward 28533978

It's caused by related, but insufficient knowledge and understanding.

Some people, ones that fall in about the 20% percentile in knowledge on a given subject, almost any subject, and have certain personality traits, such as high opinion of their ability to do things, tends to overestimate their skill badly.

To clarify that, some people who suck honestly and truly think their very good at things, even when they aren't.

That's why this happens.

Weather people, geologists and engineers tend to think they understand the climate data, often without actually having done more that cursory study on the topic, so those fields tend to have a high preponderance of people that dismiss the scientific data, due to incomplete and incorrect understanding of the topic.

In general, in any given field, you can trust what the experts say as a whole.

If you aren't personally ready to do some real study on any given field (and who is? I don't have time for most areas of intellectual discovery myself! We all specialized at times, which is fine.) Then it's best to put most of your attention into people actually doing the study themselves.

Do you trust a medical doctor with your health matters, or do you go to a smart geologist and use his information based on a few articles he read once off the internet?

Do you go to a dentist, who specializes in caring for teeth, or a barber, when you have a toothache?

If you find yourself trying to make excuses as to why you should disregard the expert opinion of the pro's, chances are really good that you simply want to have those findings to not be true!

Which is normal in a case like this. We've been given a death sentence, so many will go into denial for a long time.

But, to answer your question, that's why those people have problems with the data.

Quoting: Anonymous Coward 927602

You don't need a degree to know that global warming and others are scam or outdated.

"According to a New York Times article on the subject, there is much more skepticism of global warming among meteorologists (such as Bastardi) than among climate scientists. Such skepticism appears to be widespread among TV forecasters, about half of whom have a degree in meteorology. A study released on Monday by researchers at George Mason University and the University of Texas at Austin found that only about half of the 571 television weathercasters surveyed believed that global warming was occurring and fewer than a third believed that climate change was “caused mostly by human activities." [link to en.wikipedia.org]

What do you think, why?

Quoting: Anonymous Coward 28533978

It's caused by related, but insufficient knowledge and understanding.

Some people, ones that fall in about the 20% percentile in knowledge on a given subject, almost any subject, and have certain personality traits, such as high opinion of their ability to do things, tends to overestimate their skill badly.

To clarify that, some people who suck honestly and truly think their very good at things, even when they aren't.

That's why this happens.

Weather people, geologists and engineers tend to think they understand the climate data, often without actually having done more that cursory study on the topic, so those fields tend to have a high preponderance of people that dismiss the scientific data, due to incomplete and incorrect understanding of the topic.

In general, in any given field, you can trust what the experts say as a whole.

If you aren't personally ready to do some real study on any given field (and who is? I don't have time for most areas of intellectual discovery myself! We all specialized at times, which is fine.) Then it's best to put most of your attention into people actually doing the study themselves.

Do you trust a medical doctor with your health matters, or do you go to a smart geologist and use his information based on a few articles he read once off the internet?

Do you go to a dentist, who specializes in caring for teeth, or a barber, when you have a toothache?

If you find yourself trying to make excuses as to why you should disregard the expert opinion of the pro's, chances are really good that you simply want to have those findings to not be true!

Which is normal in a case like this. We've been given a death sentence, so many will go into denial for a long time.

But, to answer your question, that's why those people have problems with the data.

I do not believe in "Man Made Climate Change" but I do believe in "Climate Change"

I think a lot of people have a lot to gain by blaming humans and CO2.

I do however think there are cycles, we did start warming. I think we did have a period of "Global Warming" the stats show this to be true. Then as the atmosphere warmed, ice melted, the ice that melted ran into the oceans. The oceans have a huge impact on our climate, so with all this added frigid water from the ice melting, it is now causing a cooling effect.

For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.